EPTOn November 04 2026 12:19 Introvert wrote:
Schumer prob still loses a primary to AOC when he can't bring heaven to earth lol
Schumer prob still loses a primary to AOC when he can't bring heaven to earth lol
Stop, I can only get so erect!
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6055
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3499 Posts
Stop, I can only get so erect! | ||
|
Introvert
United States5079 Posts
On November 04 2026 12:21 Billyboy wrote: Almost like who wins doesn’t change math. First to the pole and gerrymandering are also still awful. The dark money in politics is still horrendous and so on. You have to realize all us non Americans and a few of you guys as well don’t treat politics as team sports where all we care about is our side winning. I told you why I wanted my side to win. Not for team sport reasons, you just need to accept that so when a future election makes you sad it's less catastrophic. I expect to lose about half the time. It would be better if more people could think like that. | ||
|
Hat Trick of Today
205 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46663 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5079 Posts
On November 04 2026 12:30 Hat Trick of Today wrote: God you suck so freaking much lmao. “I expect my side to lose about half the time”. I fail to see the problem? I've been posting here since before Trump. I've seen good and bad. Shame I wasn't here for 2010 lol | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8770 Posts
On November 04 2026 12:21 Billyboy wrote: Almost like who wins doesn’t change math. First to the pole and gerrymandering are also still awful. The dark money in politics is still horrendous and so on. You have to realize all us non Americans and a few of you guys as well don’t treat politics as team sports where all we care about is our side winning. to be a fly on the wall wherever Elon is right now  500(?) million dollars in PAC money alone this season and countless algo boosts and manipulations on twitter. a wave so monumental those shameless gerrymandering donkeys get ejected convincingly is something else. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3499 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46663 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3499 Posts
On November 04 2026 12:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I really hope that Abdul El-Sayed wins Michigan. NYTimes is projecting him to win by 5%. Super satisfying when he was smeared with the dumbest Islamophobic nonsense imaginable. Flashback to my favorite moment of the election: ![[image loading]](https://i.redd.it/yijbj93l68wh1.jpeg) | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8770 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5079 Posts
And honestly if you don't enjoy this part of politics then you are just missing out | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10622 Posts
ITS A BLEXASSSSSSS | ||
|
PhoenixVoid
Canada32761 Posts
| ||
|
FlaShFTW
United States10622 Posts
On November 04 2026 13:09 PhoenixVoid wrote: Blue Texas and Kansas electing a Democratic senator for the first time since almost a century. This is an outrageous, historic night. This is a magnitude 9 earthquake to the GOP. Absolute tsunami. Fucking crazy results right now. Incredible. Texas sweep. Everything is ocming up Dem. | ||
|
Fleetfeet
Canada2851 Posts
On November 04 2026 05:42 dyhb wrote: I’m here for the theology in politics. The acceptance and love is just a part of it all as the repentance and change. At least in the mainstream denominations. Lots of warnings in that book for people that only hear the first part. ...kind of? The problem is people like to be selective in their understanding of "who their neighbour is" in biblical terms. That's partly because the bible is a few thousand years out of context and in several different languages, but also because people don't actually want to do the mental/emotional labour to be 'like Jesus', they just want to talk and feel good about it. At least, the majority of people - plenty of saints in churches I've been to, and also plenty unaffiliated with any church. For reference of ambiguity - the parable of the Good Samaritan is on the surface a story regarding how being a good neighbour is being compassionate towards anyone (which is good and all) With proper historical context it can also be understood as Jesus telling the rabbis to reject scripture, which is part of what made it controversial. Rabbis, historically, were 'scripture lawyers' and would play games with each other (or send their trainees to do it) where they'd challenge each other on their knowledge of the law. That's what's happening in the story, as it was against scripture for certain religiously affiliated jewish people to touch the dead, so the priest and levite that walk past are understood to do so for 'lawful' reasons and would be heard as correct by Jesus' audience. Then, the one not bound by scriptural law is the one who has the space to act on compassion and is the 'good neighbour'. Bit of a tangent, but yeah. The acceptance and love is certainly a part of it, but it's pretty consistently observavble that such love isn't always offered to everyone, both historically and in our everyday lives. The denomimation I used to be a part of recently re-banned the gays from a whole lot of things, for example. A bit rambly, but hopefully scratches your theology in politics itch. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9073 Posts
| ||
|
PhoenixVoid
Canada32761 Posts
Trump is surprisingly accepting the results and says he wants to negotiate with Democrats on bills. Not even he can deny the scale of this beatdown. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3499 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5079 Posts
With that said, a lot of interesting stuff here and warnings for both parties. Significant gender gap, GOP won men but not by as much as normal and lost women convincingly. GOP saw Latino reversion from 2024 but only back to 2020 ish levels and not 2018. GOP may really have a new floor to work from with this group. Relatedly, immigration was the only issue voters trusted the GOP on more. ICE appears to be unpopular but it seems like thst shouldn't be confused for a desire to return to de facto open borders. GOP lost a lot of gains with younger voters. Only a third of voters have a positive or somewhat positive view of socialism (still too high but it's still 2-1 against). On pretty much no topic did voters trust either party with majority. Even on healthcare dems only at 49%. On government corruption dems, gop, and neither all in the 30s lol. But Iran and the Economy most say very important naturally. And 52% say support for transgender rights has gone too far with the remaining 48% split between good enough and not far enough. So again something for dems to watch out for. Also have to look at ballot props. Some are really fun, you see red states vote for Dem ideas and vice versa. Example, the keeping boys out of girls sports ballot prop looks to have passed in CO. So all in all people are angry, it seems they hate and don't trust either party. As has been the case for some time now, our politics is about voting AGAINST things at least as much as voting FOR things. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-elections/exit-polls Edit: similar prop to CO mayne passing in deep blue Oregon. Billionaire tax might actually fail in California but it might take a while to find out, polls had it close. | ||
|
dyhb
United States857 Posts
On November 04 2026 13:51 Fleetfeet wrote: I grant you that both errors are widespread. This is more of a forum that errs on the left-wing morph/misunderstanding of mainstream Christianity, like acceptance also requires condoning the sin itself and not asking for any repentance and change. It dwells heavy on the love and acceptance side, and checks out for the "go and sin no more" side (which is the nuance that is most often lost in my opinion.) It didn't sink Talarico when he tried to walk back past comments, so it didn't have political ramifications this time around....kind of? The problem is people like to be selective in their understanding of "who their neighbour is" in biblical terms. That's partly because the bible is a few thousand years out of context and in several different languages, but also because people don't actually want to do the mental/emotional labour to be 'like Jesus', they just want to talk and feel good about it. At least, the majority of people - plenty of saints in churches I've been to, and also plenty unaffiliated with any church. For reference of ambiguity - the parable of the Good Samaritan is on the surface a story regarding how being a good neighbour is being compassionate towards anyone (which is good and all) With proper historical context it can also be understood as Jesus telling the rabbis to reject scripture, which is part of what made it controversial. Rabbis, historically, were 'scripture lawyers' and would play games with each other (or send their trainees to do it) where they'd challenge each other on their knowledge of the law. That's what's happening in the story, as it was against scripture for certain religiously affiliated jewish people to touch the dead, so the priest and levite that walk past are understood to do so for 'lawful' reasons and would be heard as correct by Jesus' audience. Then, the one not bound by scriptural law is the one who has the space to act on compassion and is the 'good neighbour'. Bit of a tangent, but yeah. The acceptance and love is certainly a part of it, but it's pretty consistently observavble that such love isn't always offered to everyone, both historically and in our everyday lives. The denomimation I used to be a part of recently re-banned the gays from a whole lot of things, for example. A bit rambly, but hopefully scratches your theology in politics itch. | ||
| ||
